Philosophy Now Forum

Greta wrote:While I normally hate fighting, it's funny with you because you get SOOOO wild and crazy - and from someone who claims that we need not worry about anything because it's all "just an illusion" and none of it actually exists or matters. Your response shows that not even YOU believe your own words. Rather, you seem to be trying to convince yourself. You might as well admit that the reality you have been so keen to dismiss is thoroughly real and actually try learning something instead of dismissing science and other people's hard-won knowledge.

If you truly believe all is One and that separation is an illusion, and that love is the way, then you would apologise to me for your foul-mouthed insults in response to some simple questioning of your ideas. You should find the apology easy to make because, after all, it's all just an illusion, right?

Seriously - how can you keep telling everyone that nothing exists and is just an illusion when you take it all more seriously than others do? Your actions speak more loudly than your words.

Shut up. Life is not an illusion, ''the ego self'' is an illusion, please listen carefully to what's actually being discussed before opening your gob next time. There's the appearance of worry, but there is no worrier , that's the illusion ...how many more times do you want me to repeat myself to you until you finally get it'?

Don't speak unless you have something genuine to say about the thread topic. You are beginning to sound like a worn out record spinning the same old back hands, you don't listen to what's being pointed to, you are nothing more than a barking dog.

I admit I'm crazy, and that in my logic makes me the sane one.

Lacewing wrote:Although I don’t believe in a god entity that exists separately and “reigns” over all of life, I have always seen ongoing and continual signs of an interconnectedness throughout all. It makes the most sense to me that the idea of “God” must include and reside in ALL equally. Why would there be anything NOT of “God”? Why would there be any “insides” and “outsides” of God -– such designations are surely the ideas of man, for man’s manipulation and self-promotion.

Therefore, I think it’s most reasonable to view any god force as inherent and equally distributed -– because, again, what ELSE is there? So if all is god, then that would point to all of us being examples of the many creative explorations and aspects of God. God playing and exploring through all of it/us. Each person reflecting a different potential to be manifested and explored: a different balance of attributes, ego, intoxication, needs, fears, courage, vision, clarity, etc.

All of this "God" potential is being expressed through many different characteristics, while being narrowly defined and judged by man’s limited and controlling vision/understanding. As parts of God argue that they are MORE of God, they demonstrate that particular manifestation of creative delusion and ego. Whereas God is actually ALL creative energy/exploration of infinite/ever-expanding potential. Nothing more sacred than anything else. ALL divine! ALL "God" -- because why would anything be excluded?

God is specific.
God is always present.

All, is not always present.
Therefore, all is not God.

Only what is always present is God.

For example, a tropical vacation is not God because a tropical vacation is not always present, though God is always present on a tropical vacation, if you but open your eyes and see.

Dontaskme wrote:the problem lies with the identification with a self, that's the suffering

Lacewing wrote:Why is it really a problem?

Mainly, the problem is because of (Pain) and (Suffering) ....Any thing that makes the claim (I suffer) .... is isolating oneself from the ALL resulting in lack or fear, it is to cut oneself off from the real beauty of ALL that is.
But I agree with you in that it doesn't matter if that's what's happening, is appearing to be, it doesn't make any difference to oneness because it's not oneness that is suffering here at all. The mirror is never effected by what it reflects whether it be pain or pleasure. But the sentient creature is designed to move more towards pleasure and avoid pain...and that is the suffering.

Life dictates pain, pleasure,emotions and feeling anyway so all these senses are unavoidable. But they are just sensations, they are not real. In the human consciousness this can be seen that none of what happens to us is ever personal.,and that all senses are arising from nowhere, and not from the body, the body is just the sensor mechanism, the body never suffered the pain, or is interested in pleasure, it's job is just to function and survive. It's the mind that says, this is my pleasure or my pain, or my body, but that's the illusion, there is no separate mind or my thoughts that are real, but it sure does feel like there is, and that's just how this energy plays out as if it were really happening to a me inside this body.

If there is the sense of ' separate me' then that too is just this oneness playing the sense of 'me' ....but that suffering appearing to be happening to a 'sense of me' is the illusion, it's happening, but not to one particular thing..in reality there is no 'me' being 'me', there's just boundless beingness aka everything appearing as if there is a me.

Nothing is a problem, but it can appear that way when there is identification with the 'me' that's not actually there. So this is about the end of suffering for the imagined 'me'...but if people don't care about the end of suffering, that too is what's being expressed by everything aka oneness.

There is nothing wrong with suffering, like I've already mentioned before, suffering is part of the dynamic of beingness, it serves as reminder that beneath all suffering is the bliss of your true nature which is this boundless unconditional oneness or love that never ever suffered. Knowing this is beautiful because one can simply rest there instead of identifying with something that's not real and that will always pass away, but what you truly are never passes away. The freedom of no mind/self is all that we are and that's what makes life so beautiful because it is so boundlessly free and closer and more intimate that our very own skin.

It's just that some people start to question this 'me' that apparently suffers in the desire to end that suffering, and that is when the realisation comes of oneness without a second .. but in other people there is no questioning about their 'me' and those people live out the rest of their lives in quiet desperation and limitation...and then get offended when their small mindedness is pointed out to them as if they were trying to defend something, never quite knowing the freedom, richness and vastness of their true being that never needs to be defended because it's everything that ever was /is forever.

Walker wrote:God is specific.

According to who?

Walker wrote:God is always present. All, is not always present. Therefore, all is not God. Only what is always present is God.

But nothing is always present... so then God is nothing?

Walker wrote:if you but open your eyes and see.

See what... your crazy-ass logic? That's not what I see with open eyes. Maybe that's what you see.

Did God create all?

Lacewing wrote: But nothing is always present... so then God is nothing?

God is always present.
Nothing is a concept.
Concepts are not always present.
Therefore, God is not a concept.

Walker wrote:

Lacewing wrote: But nothing is always present... so then God is nothing?

God is always present.
Nothing is a concept.
Concepts are not always present.
Therefore, God is not a concept.

You said this previously: "Only what is always present is God."

So what is always present? Using your logic, what is God?

Greta wrote:While I normally hate fighting, it's funny with you because you get SOOOO wild and crazy - and from someone who claims that we need not worry about anything because it's all "just an illusion" and none of it actually exists or matters. Your response shows that not even YOU believe your own words. Rather, you seem to be trying to convince yourself. You might as well admit that the reality you have been so keen to dismiss is thoroughly real and actually try learning something instead of dismissing science and other people's hard-won knowledge.

If you truly believe all is One and that separation is an illusion, and that love is the way, then you would apologise to me for your foul-mouthed insults in response to some simple questioning of your ideas. You should find the apology easy to make because, after all, it's all just an illusion, right?

Seriously - how can you keep telling everyone that nothing exists and is just an illusion when you take it all more seriously than others do? Your actions speak more loudly than your words.

Dontaskme wrote:Shut up.

I don't have to say anything. When you go into hysteria, you reveal the emptiness of your ideas. After all, if you are so clearly maladjusted it's a poor advertisement for your paradigms.

I have met many like you before - new agers with broad abstract beliefs about love who become shockingly vicious when challenged. The dynamic seems to be part repression of anger, part overcompensation for that inner anger and part denial that there is an issue. The answer is to pan back from superstitious broad abstract notions and focus on the "small picture", practicalities and relationships, and preferably spend time in nature and other species for further grounding.

Dontaskme wrote:Life is not an illusion, ''the ego self'' is an illusion, please listen carefully to what's actually being discussed before opening your gob next time. There's the appearance of worry, but there is no worrier , that's the illusion ...how many more times do you want me to repeat myself to you until you finally get it'?

Bait and switch. You have often claimed many things to be illusory. Often. Don't lie.

Re: you claim, I'd be interested to see how you define "ego self" in this context. Are you claiming that our actual sense of being is an illusion?

Dontaskme wrote:Don't speak unless you have something genuine to say about the thread topic. You are beginning to sound like a worn out record spinning the same old back hands, you don't listen to what's being pointed to, you are nothing more than a barking dog.

I think, for each rude statement like this from you, I will chase another of your posts and hammer its weak logic until you learn to speak without abuse.

PS. First counter attack is done. Learn respect or suffer me chasing your posts around the board with no respite

Lacewing wrote:

Walker wrote:

Lacewing wrote: But nothing is always present... so then God is nothing?

God is always present.
Nothing is a concept.
Concepts are not always present.
Therefore, God is not a concept.

You said this previously: "Only what is always present is God."

So what is always present? Using your logic, what is God?

Well, before we go skipping hand-and-hand into your whimsy, let us summarize the specific and differentiated characteristics of God that have been listed thus far, and that are obvious by all that is known to man, and turns your Theory into Swiss Cheese.

God is specific.
God is always present.

All, is not always present.
Therefore, all is not God.

Only what is always present is God.

For example, a tropical vacation is not God because a tropical vacation is not always present, though God is always present on a tropical vacation, if you but open your eyes and see.

God is always present.
Nothing is a concept.
Concepts are not always present.
Therefore, God is not a concept.

And then, let us abide in consideration of these implications, in His name, reason being that the instant you differentiate with the name, then you lose the claim to All, so just keep right on with the characteristics and before you know it, you may have a portrait of the differentiated king.

After all, the word God itself that you introduced began the differentiation, as did language itself … so you can’t do a crop-out with this God is All business.

Give these characteristics and the truth its due.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9U1v01SGtGE

Walker wrote:Only what is always present is God.

What is always present -- that is God?

Is God the "creator"? What did God create?

Lacewing wrote: Why must we remember that? Why can't we believe this movie? It's as if you want to turn on the theater lights in the middle of the movie, and tell everyone "Sorry folks, show is over!" But maybe WE'RE HERE FOR THE FUCKING MOVIE! We bought a ticket, and we don't want someone telling us to leave the theater because it's pointless to experience it. So what? All sorts of things are "pointless"... everything could be pointless, and maybe that's the point.

One energy is playing all the roles in the play, and in that multiplex cinema dynamic this one forgets its real self by playing it's not so real self. This one energy plays a game of hide and seek with itself...always remembering it's only ever one and the same energy appearing as everything.

The movie of life is playing to itself. No one is watching or playing it. It's just happening all by itself. No one bought a ticket, no one entered the stage, no one leaves the stage, here there appears to be ACTORS ...but these actors are mentally constructed ideas...which is all the play of one energy in ACT i on...it's all an act ..an amazing sound and light show for no one.

There is absolutely no meaning, reason or point to life whatsoever. Life does not carry those artificially constructed attributes or qualities, they are mentally constructed ideas.

The human mind has difficultly in accepting that because it will always question and seek a reason for being. As if there needs to be a reason. But the hard truth of the matter is we are here for the same reason the cockroaches are here. And to be fair the cockroaches are the lucky ones in that they don't seek for the meaning of life, as far as I'm aware that is because I have no idea what cockroaches are thinking about. Same applies to myself, I have no idea what my thoughts are thinking about, I only think they do, even though Icannot see or find the thinker. So I'll just settle for what ever thoughts are making up and buy that.

Conclusion GOD is Tacit.

Lacewing wrote:

Walker wrote:Only what is always present is God.

What is always present -- that is God?

Is God the "creator"? What did God create?

Remember the sweaty hands.

Well, what I see as particularly significant to philosophy out of the listed characteristics thus far identified, is:

Concepts are not always present.

You see, for this to be true to understanding, you must have experienced the premise, I Am, Therefore I Think.
And there you have the divide between known, and what is thought.

Dontaskme wrote:One energy is playing all the roles in the play

Seems so, to me.

Dontaskme wrote:this one forgets its real self by playing it's not so real self.

As a friend of mine says: "What else are we supposed to do with eternity?"

I think this idea of "real self" could be very tricky. I'm not sure it's a real thing. We are vast... we are many... we are all... ?? ...how does "real" really enter into it? Who defines this "real"? If "real" is what is when everything "layered on top" is removed, why do we want that? Why don't we love the layers? Are they not art and beauty? Are they not divine creations?

Greta wrote:
PS. First counter attack is done. Learn respect or suffer me chasing your posts around the board with no respite

Respect is earned not an automatic given.

I will always answer any questions you have, but please realise it's not me answering you, it's only your own projection echoing back at you.

Your posts will not cause any suffering in this one here simply because there is no one here in this one who could possibly suffer, so do your twisted worse if it makes you feel any better, you must protect your ego at all costs, wouldn't want that imagined thing to die would you? your no respite chasing will be like water off a ducks back and comical at the same time, so I'm up for a laugh, it's always funny watching this one chase it's own tail... ((big cheesy grin))

I've caught my tail, but I'll help you catch yours if that's what you want, because I love myself that much, I'm always on hand to help ease you/me back to clarity when confusion and misery arises... ((bigger cheesy grin))

Walker wrote:

Lacewing wrote:

Walker wrote:Only what is always present is God.

What is always present -- that is God?

Is God the "creator"? What did God create?

Remember the sweaty hands.

Oh here we go... you retreat into your insanity. It's safe there. You don't have to admit anything that might be fucked up about your logic.

Grow up, Walker. You're such a big avoidance baby.

Walker wrote:Well, what I see as particularly significant to philosophy out of the listed characteristics thus far identified, is:

Concepts are not always present.

Right, it was your stupid-ass "list", which contorted things to end up at this meaningless point, which you will now focus on because it keeps you from responding to anything else that makes sense.

You said: "Only what is always present is God."

Please explain what you see this to be.

Greta wrote:
I have met many like you before

Trust me, you have never met people like me before - you've never even met your self.

No two minds can ever meet, not even one mind can be met, have you ever met your mind?

You have a lot to learn about what's real and unreal here.